re: The WSJ take on the bottle-throwing incident

You need glasses

By the definition of the rule the defender without making a play on the ball, impeded the receivers attempt to get the ball.

Even the announcer said it was a good penalty at the time because you turn a 30 yard gain into a 15.

lol, gotcha.

Holy shite Frenzy, the game is ruined, fans are brainwashed sheep


x 100 = Big arse

Tbh (and I'm sure if you give it objective thought yourself) I don't think the bottle throwing in and of itself has anything to do with the call reversal..but having that time to see the replay over and over on our big screen did however.

So I guess in that sense the throwing shite on the field did play a part, but I think they were trying to make up for a horrible call, not appeasing an angry home crowd.

If a receiver is slowing down to catch a ball, you can’t just run into them. That gets called literally every time.

quote:

---

If a receiver is slowing down to catch a ball, you can’t just run into them.

---

I'm not meaning this to be personal, but you have zero clue what you're talking about

This is the most salient point made in this article and about the reality of sports and society as a whole

quote:

---

The tiresome obsessiveness with instant replay and slo-mo forensics has made too many fans think that games should be immaculate events with no room for human interpretation or error.

This obstinate fussiness, routinely soft-pedaled as the pursuit of “fairness,” has infected sports from the big time professionals all the way down to Pee-wee weekends.

It’s why NFL games are constantly delayed by “challenges” of pinkie touches and out-of-bounds toes and you need at least three Ph.D.s to know what a catch is anymore. It’s why the final two minutes of too many NBA games have become borderline unwatchable. It’s why the mention of VAR makes a European soccer fan crawl under a coffee table. It’s why over-criticized youth sports referees and umpires are bailing by the busload.

This pursuit of “fairness”—a lot of it driven by ever-accessible gambling apps—sells a dubious idea: that sports, or life, will ever truly be fair. Setbacks aren’t there to overcome—they’re to be reviewed and overturned.

---

This ticky-tacky autopsy of every play, every lowered helmet, every shake and bake has gotten old, but networks love it because it means more advertising space.

quote:

---

If a receiver is slowing down to catch a ball, you can’t just run into them. That gets called literally every time.

---

once the ball is in the air, it belongs to both the receiver and the defender

if the receiver "slows down to come back to the ball" and moves through the body of the trailing defender to do it, it's either no call, or it's actually pass interference against the offense


this is not baseball where the tie goes to the runner


once the fricking ball is in the air, the poor little WR cannot claim to be a victim

does it seem douchebag referees know this? No. It doesn't. On the P5 level of top ten, they're all compromised now

DII refs are honest. P5 D1, not honest.

quote:

---

( the penalty was originally announced on the wrong player and was supposed to be OPI on the UGA receiver

---

I don’t believe that for a second. The more I watch it, the more I think DPI was the right call. The defender initiated contact then moves the receiver aside and interrupts his ability to turn back to run his route.

It might be ticky-tack, but they made contact and the receivers path to run his route was impeded. I’ve seen worse called and more egregious not called.

Glad to hear Texas is getting its arse handed to it by the media for that fiasco.